Before considering Professor X’s assertion that the Roosevelt Corollary actually corrupted the Monroe Doctrine’s “benevolent intent,” it is worth considering whether or not the Monroe Docterine was as benevolent as the unnamed professor seems to suggest. Professor X considers Monroe’s 1823 Doctrine an act of benevolence, in which an increasingly dominant world power generously extends protection over its continental neighbors. Yet the Professor ignores the inherently imperialistic subtext that is contained within the Doctrine, and thus his comparison of the Monroe Doctrine to the Roosevelt Corollary omits a fundamental aspect of America’s colonialist history.
Monroe wrote that Spain and Portugal’s efforts "to improve the condition of the people of [colonized countries in the Americas]” yielded disappointing results, and suggests that the United States was better positioned to take on the role of colonial overseer given the nation’s unique geographical, social, and political connection to the Americas. Monroe justified this right to benevolent imperialism largely around the idea that America’s government, “has been achieved by the loss of so much blood and treasure, and matured by the wisdom of their most enlightened citizens, [which has produced] unexampled felicity [throughout America].” Yet contained within this utopian treatment of the American political system is the inherent suggestion that the American definition of “unexampled felicity” was universally applicable throughout the Americas. Here, the issue of textuality is raised; while politically, the protection of American countries by the United States suggests a benevolent intention, the idea that America had indirect authority over its neighbors indicates an impe...
... middle of paper ...
...versal definition of the “civilized nation,” a notion first encountered in the Monroe Doctrine. The parallelism of the issues of textuality lends credibility to the assertion that the Roosevelt Corollary was a natural political evolution from the Monroe Doctrine. America’s turn of the century militaristic power coupled with the continuous dissipation of the institution of direct colonialism during the same period produced an international landscape in which America no longer had to rely solely upon “ideological proliferation” in order to avoid entanglement with European imperialistic interests in the Americas. While Roosevelt’s Corollary extended the reach of the Monroe Doctrine (both physically and ideologically), an understanding of both document’s respective ties to a deeper adherence to imperialism reveals an evolutionary connection rather than a corruption.
The Monroe Doctrine reflected the concerns and ambitions of a fledgling nation that was brave enough to declare its sovereignty on the world stage. The Doctrine, in stating that European powers ought not to intervene in America’s affairs, established the US as a world power, although one that had inadequate, hemispheric aspirations. However, these aspirations would extend, and in future years the Doctrine would substantiate its usefulness for interventionists, as well as protectionists. Being conceivably the most distinguishable and the most revered as regards principles of diplomacy, the doctrine’s influence on the popular imagination was so great that it described the limits of standard decisions on policy, in turn influencing the choice of preferences that US Presidents had for most of the last two centuries.
Steven Hook and John Spanier's 2012 book titled “American foreign policy since WWII" serves as one of the most important texts that can be used in understanding the underlying complexities on American foreign policies. Like the first readings that are analyzed in class (American Diplomacy by George Kennan and Surprise, Security, and the American Experience by John Lewis Gaddis), this text also brings history into a more understandable context. Aside from being informative and concise in its historical approach, Hook and Spanier also critiques the several flaws and perspectives that occurred in the American foreign policy history since World War II.
The Roosevelt Corollary greatly affected American foreign policy. It was in sharp contrast to the Monroe Doctrine, put in place to stop foreign intervention with the American continents. In 1823 President Monroe implemented US policy that stated European powers were not allowed to colonize or interfere with the newly budding United States or the Americas. In 1904 President Roosevelt expanded upon this policy in response to European intervention with Latin America. This policy became known as the Roosevelt Corollary. The document echoed the style of leadership President Roosevelt became synonymous with. This more aggressive form of policy became known as Big Stick Diplomacy. Foreign policy in the United States would forever be changed by President Roosevelt’s reinterpretation of the Monroe Document. The Roosevelt Corollary would later go on to affect decisions the United States made in regards to the Cold War, Cuba, The Middle East and many more. To understand the impact of this, we must look back to the Monroe Doctrine.
Between 1895 and 1920, the years in which William McKinley, Theodore Roosevelt, William Taft, and Woodrow Wilson reigned in the presidents, the United States struggled for not only justice at home but abroad as well. During this period policies such as Roosevelt’s Big Stick diplomacy, William Taft’s Dollar diplomacy, and Woodrow Wilson’s Moral diplomacy were all used in foreign affairs in hopes of benefit for all involved. However, it would be appropriate to say that self-interest was the most important driving factor for American policy and can be exemplified through economic, social, and political relations.
1. The Monroe Doctrine was a bold statement of American Foreign Policy-discuss its origins-its focus at the time and the impact it has during the pre-Civil War period of American diplomacy.
Britain, like Spain, had permanent colonies, settlements, and claims in the new world. The one prized colony to their colonial chest was Canada, supplying fur, trade, and money to the British people. In regards to Britain’s currently existing colony, the Monroe doctrine professed no disavowal of the right of the British to manage their respective colony (Yale Law School). Yet, the British territorial claims in Oregon, supported by the notion of preexisting settlements by their fur trading company, was naturally at direct odds with the United States’ belief in Manifest Destiny. This issue already provided a reason for Monroe and Adam’s to be uneasy over British presence in the new world. It was in the national interest of the United States to put an end to the prospect of colonization of the Oregon
In the year of 1803, America’s territory was expanded by nearly double its original size. Such an acquisition turned out to be very beneficial, but much like a rose, such a feat did come with its thorns. The Louisiana Purchase posed several moral dilemmas for President Thomas Jefferson, but overall the advantages outweighed the disadvantages. The weakened country of Spain returned the Louisiana Purchase back to France, which at this time was led by Napoleon Bonaparte. Purchasing this land would protect the United States’ ability to ensure the ownership and use of the vital port of New Orleans. This buy also proved to be beneficial in that it not only prevented a war between America and France but also eliminated France’s presence as an enemy in North America. The Louisiana Purchase perhaps opened the idea of ‘Manifest Destiny’ to the United States and its citizens. With all of these advantages, the end certainly justifies the means.
The United States of America has never been content with stagnation. The landmass of the Thirteen Colonies was enough to rival that of the Mother country from which they separated. The forefathers believed that it was the manifest destiny of this nation to eventually claim the expansion from the Atlantic to the Pacific Ocean. By 1890, nearly a hundred years following the original claim of Manifest Destiny, the land that was once open, was now under American control. But no sooner was the Great American Frontier closed, than was the door to East Asian expansion opened with the great gold key of American diplomacy. In a world where imperialism was contagious, and cartographers had to work around the clock to keep up with an ever-changing geopolitical landscape, the United States seized the opportunity to establish herself as a significant world power. With great expansionist minds at her helm, such as Theodore Roosevelt and Howard Taft the United States began to grow beyond her border to claim stake in this wide-open world. This new expansionism of the late nineteenth and early twentieth century was a different institution than its early to mid nineteenth century counterpart. Still, the drive to exercise the sovereignty of the United State and to propel itself over the world’s stage was the same then as it was in the time of Thomas Jefferson. In order to understand this assertion, attention must be given to three levels of analysis. First, the similarities that exist between the drive and purpose of old and new expansion must be taken into account. Second, the differences in the global political scene must be considered. Finally, there exits differences in the means by which expansion occurred.
The Monroe Doctrine can be considered as the United States first major declaration to the world as a fairly new nation. The Monroe Doctrine was a statement of United States policy on the activity and rights of powers in the Western Hemisphere during the early to mid 1800s. The doctrine established the United States position in the major world affairs of the time. Around the time of the Napoleonic Wars in the 1820s, Mexico, Argentina, Chile and Colombia all gained their independence from Spanish control ("Monroe Doctrine" 617). The United States was the first nation to recognize their independence from Spain. The European powers had still considered the new nations as still belonging to Spain. The Americans had a sense of pride in the former Spanish colonies gaining independence. They felt as if the American Revolution was a model for these new Latin American nations (Faragher 265). After Napoleon went down, the monarchy in Spain regained power ("Monroe Doctrine" 617). The Spanish had felt embarrassed after losing their colonies to independence. In 1815 Tsar Alexander I of Russia and the monarchs of Austria and Prussia formed the Holy Alliance. This alliance was a group set out to maintain autocracy (Migill 594). Spain then demanded the return of its colonies of the New World (Migill 594). With the possibility of help from the Holy Alliance and France, Spain’s goal was looking realistic. The Americans also feared that if the Spanish colonies were recaptured the United States might be next ("Monroe Doctrine" 617).
The U.S has had many great presidents throughout its history. From the freedom fighter, George Washington, to the abolitionist, Abraham Lincoln, it is obvious the rooster of great presidents isn't short of names. But the president that rises above the rest has to be Theordore Roosevelt. This is because of his foreign policy, unbreakable determination, and his domestic policy.
The initial prelude of our demise began in the mid eighteen-hundreds when government covertly funded projects for political use which in return altered American culture. The United States financed many literary works that were paid to detail our exceptionalism regardless of violent eruptions and cataclysms of current culture. For instance, Alexis De Tocqueville’s description of American democracy and capitalism was financed by the government to counter the growing acceptance of Marxism (Ross.) Tocqueville’s writings influenced pro-American sympathies abroad due to his inflation of American uniqueness and liberalism. If it weren’t for the U.S. government bankrolling Tocqueville’s expedition to Civil-War Era United States, one can argue that the French writer may have painted America as a combative oppressive nation comprised of individ...
Hawley, C. (2003). U.S. foreign policy. Encyclopedia of American history: Expansion and reform, 1813-1855, 4, Retrieved August 14, 2008, from Facts on File: American History Online database.
President James Monroe declared “In the discussions to which this interest has given rise and in the arrangements by which they may terminate the occasion has been judged proper for asserting, as a principle in which the rights and interests of the United States are involved, that the American continents, by the free and independent condition which they have assumed and maintain, are henceforth not to be considered as subjects for future colonization by any European powers,” on December 2, 1823 in the Monroe Doctrine. It was the first United States of America foreign policy statement that declared the settlement of the Western Hemisphere off-limits of the European nations. Though reiterated a myriad of times afterwards, it was the first document to state that the United States of America would view any attempt of any European power or allied powers to control any nation in the Western Hemisphere as hostile. The Monroe Doctrine was the United States of America’s first response to the fear that Spain would attempt to restore their former colonies in the Americas, especially Florida. Therefore, the Monroe Doctrine holds great importance to the United States of America history because it solidly produced evidence regarding how the United States would view European nations attempting to attain land in the Americas and that the United States would act upon it in order to protect its people and its land
On December 2, 1823, President James Monroe used his annual message to Congress to state a very bold and powerful message, “The American continents … are henceforth not to be considered as subjects for future colonization by any European powers” (Monroe, James). The Monroe doctrine was a massive event in United States society. Occurring in 1823, president James Monroe wrote his annual message to congress. This message contained the doctrine, which warned European powers not to interfere in the affairs of the Western Hemisphere. This was obviously a very aggressive document. This message was telling the European countries that if they interfered the United States would take aggressive action towards them.
What is the Monroe Doctrine ? The Monroe Doctrine is a policy of the United States created December 2,1823. The Monroe Doctrine states that new countries should be allowed to develop without interference from stronger countries. In other words, the United States should not interfere with affairs of smaller or weaker nations. I believe that it is possible to follow the Monroe doctrine to a point. Europe has not really been bothering us according to the news. Also, France has been having several governmental issues recently, but in no way have their issues affected us. I believe that if they ask for our help we should give it to them as long as what they are doing is not wrong. However , if they start trouble we should stop them. If they terrorize